Abstract
Conceptual and methodological problems related to Schmidt' (1975) motor schema theory are discussed. In particular, the motor schema is interpreted as representing the dynamics of the system being controlled, which may or may not be associated with a referent movement pattern. Furthermore, it is suggested that prior familiarity with a control system's dynamics is a critical but uncontrolled factor in tests of the theory, and largely accounts for their equivocal findings. These ideas are examined by two experiments in which subjects had to bimanually control the movement of a computer-displayed cursor along a track on a CRT screen. Different track orientations required different patterns of movement not entailing a single generalized motor program. Experiment 1 shows that variable track performance with a given control system, results in better transfer to novel tracks than does fixed practice. Experiment 2 demonstrates that altering the control system disrupts performance whether or not the required movements remain the same. These results indicate the need for a fundamental modification of schema theory, such that a schematic representation of effector-environment relations (effector function) is available independently of particular movement patterns used in its acquisition.